Announcing the Prog-Metal split

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 Gamemako wrote:

 MikeEnRegalia wrote:

 Gamemako wrote:

 debrewguy wrote:

Er ... why would we segregate albums by groups that are not listed at PA ? 
Unless, of course, you believe that many out and out completely un & non prog bands have managed to slip into these pure pages ???

Blind Guardian? Star One? Yeah, those.

Anyway, I think I could point out the parallels between Zero Hour and Meshuggah, but I don't think anybody would be listening. Minds are made up, and there are higher-profile listings to debate (see: Opeth).

Minds are *not* "made up", but unfortunately people like you usually bail out when it comes to proving their claims, as is the case here. I want to debate on a musical level, not on one of preconceptions.

You quoted to very same reference I made as a counter-example. I don't see you budging in any way with respect to this. Furthermore, back up your own claims before you attack others -- you said they're nothing alike, so YOU prove it. Otherwise, you have no justification for your affront.

It's much easier to prove a statement like "X is similar to Y" than a statement like "X is not similar to Y". You mentioned some parallels between the bands, with only a little more effort you could have listed those parallels to back up your point. I on the other hand don't really know where to begin, since these two bands are so different from each other. If it makes you happy I'll simply mention the vocal style, the symphonic/melodic elements which are an inherent part of ZH's music but totally absent in Meshuggah's music, the heavily downtuned guitars of Meshuggah (they even had 8 string guitars custom made) combined with their trademark low-register microtonal bends which you don't have with Zero Hour. But what do I know ...

Speaking of Opeth, I see both experimental and extreme but neither technical nor post-rock, so I won't bother making the judgment. You've made your bed, now sleep in it.

So if they're experimental they can go to "Experimental Prog Metal" ... where's the problem? They simply fit better there *musically* than in Extreme. Compare them to Into Eternity or Death and you'll hear the difference.

I won't bother making the judgment. People won't be happy wherever it goes.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to put them in the genre which fits best.

Classic prog-metal would make sense. Adding traditional to the name would imply the that the likes of Orphaned Land and Agalloch belong there.

You misunderstand the word "traditional" ... the sad thing is that you don't even consider the possibility that it might have more than one meaning.

Quite the contrary. The problem is that the word has more than one meaning, and when you say traditional, the label is nothing more than hopelessly confusing. When discussing a proper label, the idea is that you criticise to find the best one, not to accept a bad label because it works. Let's call Prog Folk Traditional Prog and see what happens. It's not that it's wrong, per se; it's just not nearly as precise as it needs to be.

I didn't choose the label, exactly for those reasons. Maybe I simply found it odd that you would choose one of the lesser known meanings to make your point. I doubt that many people would think of this particular meaning when the word "Traditional" is combined with "Prog Metal".